The job done by two different construction companies are to be discussed properly in order to get something. As a matter of fact the work done by Good International Roadways, as the author states is somehow that apparently allowance to deploy it sounds not right, however it needs a more scrutiny and a better investigations to find out the reason.
On the other hand, the work done by Appian Roadways as the author states is good in terms of durability and the current condition after four years workability, besides that the information with respect to the new purchase of so called state-of- the-art paving machinery and the new quality-control management leaves no doubt that this company’s commitment is evidently approved and the recommendation to deal with this company is a right thing.
In order to fully ensure that Appian Roadways will deliver an absolutely a good job, it is also a further investigation and check out some figures like whether or not the new machinery are purchased, how the characteristic of new machinery technically is better than the previous ones, have they been tested, the new management and his/her workforce and their background, the materials they will use like aggregates and bitumen and many other things that experts know about the good quality of pavement.
Back to the apparent failed company, the Good International Roadways, it is suggested not to reject it properly, because sometimes failure happens casually, it needs more investigation to find out the reasons of such failure. This kind of investigation is acquiring some knowledge which might be effectively helpful for the future of the client; I mean the authority of the state.
The outcome of the failed contractor for a particular job might relate to a casual element like, management, or weather condition when the asphalt were doing, or the ingredient of a particular factory were cause of it, or some other things like that.
Maybe the company is deeply sorry for the bad job done and is determined to show it strong commitment for a new job and may be cheaper to encourage the clients and suggest an economical offer in terms of the quality and price. I n this case it might be good to give them another chance only for a short job, not for a long Route that make a second catastrophe.
In conclusion, either failed company, or succeeded one are needed to be considered and approach them based on what they done rather that without any appraisal just employ the failed one. Approaching the successful contractor very easily and simply is not recommended, as they may take advantage once they do not face any challenge, the possibility that they misuse and get arrogant for their reputation, this is exactly the point that the major companies fall down, so checking them always and maintaining competitors should be a right thing.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 479 350
No. of Characters: 2318 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.678 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.839 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.821 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 39.917 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 21.67 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.734 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.138 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 7 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 153, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...igation and check out some figures like whether or not the new machinery are purchased, how th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... Route that make a second catastrophe. In conclusion, either failed company, or...
^^^^
Line 13, column 545, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng competitors should be a right thing.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, besides, however, if, may, second, so, i mean, in conclusion, kind of, no doubt, as a matter of fact, with respect to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2391.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 478.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00209205021 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9090971819 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516736401674 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 754.2 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 43.0 22.8473053892 188% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 121.568876508 57.8364921388 210% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 217.363636364 119.503703932 182% => OK
Words per sentence: 43.4545454545 23.324526521 186% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.0 5.70786347227 245% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0766859763816 0.218282227539 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0318021543014 0.0743258471296 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0230345684202 0.0701772020484 33% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0379304562282 0.128457276422 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0257132040223 0.0628817314937 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 23.8 14.3799401198 166% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 48.3550499002 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.1628742515 181% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 20.1 12.197005988 165% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.61 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 98.500998004 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 19.2 11.1389221557 172% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.